Damon Lindelof Addresses ‘The ‘Justice League’ Problem’

Published 1 year ago
by
Anthony Vieira
, Updated February 15th, 2014 at 10:00 pm,

Marvel’s wild success with their Cinematic Universe has their competitors scrambling to catch up, and as their Phase 2 kickoff, Iron Man 3, continues to dominate the box office, attention keeps turning to main rival DC/Warner Bros. and their continually-fluctuating attempt at their own Superhero All-Star Jam with a Justice League movie.

We have covered much of this ground before: will Zack Snyder step in to direct? Or will DC’s go-to story architect David S. Goyer take the reins? What “concrete” news there is about this project points toward the most level-headed approach possible by the studio: wait and see what happens with Snyder’s upcoming Man of Steel,despite strong hints that Man of Steel will somehow acknowledge the larger DC Universe and Superman’s place within it.

In a recent in-depth interview with THR, Damon Lindelof covers a wide array of topics from Lost and Star Wars and Star Trek,to his involvement with World War Z. Lindelof also touches – albeit briefly – on an interesting topic: the ‘problem’ with Justice League. There’s a pretty direct attempt to pull out some information about where the project stands, but Lindelof answers indirectly:

Lindelof: The Justice League problem? I think a lot of that depends on Man of Steel. The Justice League problem is not a problem of, who is the bad guy that Wonder Woman and Green Lantern, Superman, whoever you decide to pit them against. The problem is: What’s the tone of that movie? They’ve been struggling with launching their own tone. The tone of Green Lantern is very different from the tone of The Dark Knight. They clearly inhabit two entirely different worlds. You want to feel like someone is establishing a world where the Justice League can exist, maybe Man of Steel is that movie. If Man of Steel works, and it’s great, I think it starts to make sense where Paradise Island is in that world. Because that’s an entirely different world than the one Christopher Nolanintroduced.

This is a relevant discussion when it comes to this attempt to launch DC’s version of cinematic universe. As we’ve noted, Marvel and DC have taken a disparate approach to their comic book films, and they’ve both proven to be very successful. Marvel’s approach – as satisfyingly balanced as the first Iron Man movie was - has never shied away from the more fantastic elements of their comic book universe. The tone of Green Lantern was so wildly different from Nolan’s Dark Knight universe – and evidently the more ‘realistic’ approach of Man of Steel - that just reconciling the change in tone could arguably take a whole movie just in itself.

As critically, commercially and artistically successful as the grounded, ‘dark and gritty’ Batman reboot has been, this is still a comic book movie we’re talking about. A clash of tones can cause problems in a movie like, say, Judd Apatow’s Funny People, which melded comedy and personal drama in a hit-or-miss way. Though The Dark Knight is a reality-based film, it’s still set in a fantasy universe, and a stark clashing of tones – such as a mash-up of left-field characters like Lobo and The Flash with the current, more literal-minded incarnation of Batman – could be very interesting. It may prove too experimental for what could be an incredibly expensive project, however, so smoothing out the differing tones of these characters’ worlds would likely be the first course of action.

We’ll likely find out what DC/Warner Bros. has in mind once the box office receipts for Man of Steel have been tallied.

I always used to assume there’s a built-in audience for these movies, but now I think that can only go so far. They can easily underperform, or be a financial hit that doesn’t manage to lead to sequels.

I think the problem has been solved. A tone is about to be established for future films which was inspired by and started with the Dark Knight trilogy. It is the most accessible ‘type’ of story telling possible that can appeal to main stream audiences and comic fans despite the disappointments when it departs from comic book canon. I suppose you could say that setting a tone for EVERY DC character might be challenging but I don’t think so. Grounded and character driven does not mean a total departure from the surreal. I thought the movie District 9 was a grounded and character driven movie yet still was as much science fiction as any movie before it. Even the Dark Knight movies were filled with fantastic devises and characters but still expertly created a story the average person could buy into. Unless Man of Steel is a complete flop – which I would be stunned beyond belief if that happened – it effectively ends DC’s ‘problem.”

I don’t know. I thought the Batman movies strained a little here and there (especially the last one) in maintaining the “realism.” Overall I think they do a fantastic job. I’m able to watch them again and again, but I think that style could easily fall apart really fast if not handled skillfully.

I’m looking forward to MoS but I’m not confident to really look beyond it as if it’s going to succeed in opening the door to the DC universe. I have to wait and see.

Anything can fall apart of course it takes a more skillfull approach to ground everything in reality. Marvel films may not be very deep but they are still widely loved because they know what they are and stick to that. Grounded in reality is a riskier approach but a diffrent one that marvel. Hence why it should be done by WB. yeah DKR was clearly more comic booky that its predecessor mainly in the last 40 minutes, but it didnt hurt the film for me. (Still prefer the dark knight tho)

I think I have a different take on “realism” as not something that is recognizable or even possible BUT something that is explained in a way that is grounded in realistic principles. FOR example the sonar devise that Batman uses to locate the Joker. If you think about it logically it is absurd…but the way it is explained in the movie is what allows me to accept it.

I think the difference between movies “grounded” in realism and those that are not lies in taking the opportunity to offer a pseudo-rational explanation. In Green Lantern for instance no one bothered to explain how Hal Jordan gets to the “center of the universe” and back so fast. It appears he goes through a worm hole – but the fact it is left up in the air makes it unrealistic. Another example is why in the beginning of the film is Abin Sur flying around in a ship then after NO Green Lantern uses one. Grounding something in realistic terms is different from saying it is itself realistic – they are two different things.

I didn’t finish the Green Lantern but I do agree with you on the sonar thing. Nolan’s movies weren’t comic book movies. They were science fiction movies which is why the films were successful. It attracted the Syfy fans, the comic fans, super hero movie fans and drama fans.

Not so different for me. Things seem plausible. I think what I meant is the whole idea of a man becoming Batman with the costume and training etc. They made it plausible in the context of the movie. But it strains for me. The secret identity in particular. White Male, certain height and build, has a lot of expensive things, therefore has a lot of money, is mostly in Gotham City. I give up. It could be anyone.

I liked DKR but I was watching it assuming that everyone knew Bruce was Batman. I was wondering what Gordan was talking about at the end, I almost thought they were just keeping up the act.

Overall I think the Batman movies are so packed with plot and dialog that the viewer doesn’t have time to dwell on questions. I think Nolan is pretty exceptional and that most directors couldn’t have done that.

So then you are saying the director didn’t have anything to do with the movie and he just said “Damon do you think we should put a giant head over here or over there?” I don’t understand why people have such a big problem with him.

Isn’t it a great irony that Nolan’s Batman trilogy has been so financially and critically successful for Warner Brothers and DC but at the same time it works against the notion of a viable and consistent and unified “Justice League” film?

The suits at WB/DC must be so conflicted because they know they can’t ride on Nolan’s universally acclaimed Batman. They know they have to wait a while to craft a whole new Batman that will fit into a JL flck.

Obviously, they never thought about The Justice League when Nolan made his pitch to them.

Indeed, if and when it’s time for The Justice League to unite, it will inevitably be a job for Superman!

I disagree. I think that he could expand it into that world but he is so protective of his take on Batman that he refuses to do so. I certainly don’t think a Justice League was ever planned which would have likely changed some aspects of the movies but at the end of the day – so what? Instead of starting with Batman you start with Superman.

Nolan made his thoughts on everything clear from the start, its not like he came out after TDKR and said his trilogy would stand alone and not have other superheroes in that world.

Yes, they will definitely start with Superman now. That does not change the fact that people think of Batman right now as the Bale/Nolan version. He created a vision on a character that any studio would want to continue to bank off of, but cannot.

It would be like Favreau creating an Iron Man that Marvel could not have built off of. (Cant think of an example of how he could have done that, but I think you should get my point)

Actually, while Christopher Nolan has made it clear that he did not film his series with other heroes in mind, choosing to focus solely on the Batman character and his respective mythology (as he saw fit of course), he did film the first two films to be open to other interpretations. He approached each film individually and did not think firmly about future films. While he of course had the thought of approaching the film sequels as the continuation and the ending of the story he began in Batman Begins, Nolan only focused of the film at the time and was never sure if he would return to direct or even script the next onscreen adventure of the Batman.

It was only when The Dark Knight Rises was coming to reality that Nolan recognized he would rather end the story before it continually blows up.

Batman Begins was designed to serve as the quintessential origin story for Batman in general. While it was more grounded, the tone and visuals actually point to a comic book style and hinted at fantastical undercurrents juxtaposed to the “reality” of that universe. It ended so it can be taken in any direction.

The Dark Knight took the route of more grounded crime drama. It is actually interesting as it is more grounded than its predecessor but I found the vents to be more improbable and fantastical and more in line with the essence of the comic books. Batman a step ahead with irradiated bills, and sonar device and spying Harvey Dent before formally meeting him while doing some intense detective work (even if a short montage) against the Joker. All the other characters were also in line deeply with the comic book parts. The ending could have led to numerous directions. “[The Batman] changed things…forever.”

By opting to deliver a finale in the form of The Dark knight Rises and some choices that overlooked established potential – the League of Shadows, Harvey Dent’s legacy as Two-Face-, the film, in my opinion, is the only limiting factor.

If WB really wants to find a good idea in capitalizing the success of the modern series but move in a new direction, they can easily take an alternative route: continue, even if loosely, the events of the first two film and go in alternative direction of The Dark Knight Rises. Batman Begins is the quintessential origin that can be taken any direction while The Dark Knight caps off year one for the Batman and leaves the Batman in a rather interesting state.

It will isolate fans no doubt. But its an alternative route. Reboot for some reason feels like a bad word to some and prefer to see the film continue from TDKR which in my opinion makes no sense story wise. Reboot is good option but from a business standpoint and logic, WB and DC will like to capitalize the success of the last series even if rather loosely. This options takes out the more divisive film that causes most of the complication and allows basic plots such as origins and much the world and characters to be explored. Most audience members who watch the films probably have not seen all three to begin with and the one that was probably mostly seen and liked is the one with the Joker. Most would not even care as James Bond has done this, The Fast and the Furious franchise has done so, and even the X-Men franchise which despite any controversy from fans have been building interest as of late.

This option allows for supporting cast members to return while not dependent on the star or director. It allows to explore and introduce new elements to the world vaguely familiar. Fans and audience will accept it as each of the films in the trilogy was different either way.

Good rundown of the trilogy. Yes, Nolan approached each movie as a stand alone, so they would all work on their own. BUT he and Goyer have also stated that they knew there was going to be a beginning, middle, and end. That is the key. Making a trilogy where each film can stand alone, but also be part of one, much larger, story. He knew from the jump that it was going to be a trilogy.

I would respond to the rest of your comment, but I have tired myself out with the same old talk.

We dont know what WB/DC is going to do. We will just have to wait and see.

Yeah that is why I could not find myself to actually post an individual response to the article itself because at this point, with nothing to go on, the conversation becomes repetitive in cases. I just hope its not a full continuation of the entire trilogy- does not make sense to me.

However they did approach it as beginning middle end but just executed the first two parts of the story to be ambigious enough to be continued without Nolan and Co. in case Nolan did not find enough energy or the “right” story. It was when the reach the final film that Nolan and Co. said now we can really tie up the first two films together and make an ending. Batman Begins and The Dark Knight have very few ties when watching back to back. Yes the film’s narrative continues, but they are entirely different. It is only when the The Dark Knight Rises came out, can the audience actually see what glues them together.

Most fans forgive minor plot holes so long as they are not detrimental to the overall movie, and serve a purpose.

Well, I think we’re all forgetting that Selina Kyle didn’t really have an origin story, and heck, im pretty sure no one even called her “Catwoman,” but we all knew it was her. For me, I was satisfied with the character because Hathaway’s performance was awesome, and the character itself I think was written very well (and Dat Ass). So, although Superman and Batman are getting their own origin films, maybe it won’t be 100 percent nessecary for all members of the JL to have their own origin story, as long as their characters in the movie are written extremely well and performed extremely well also.

Without a doubt, the only thing that could drive all these heroes together in the movie, without being silly, is the Tone. As long as the characters act within the paradigms of the tone, their integrity should be in tact. MOS doesn’t have to mirror the TDK’s realism, but it does need to be able to exist in a TDK type of world. The more and more I think about it, the more I think they will reboot Batman, with new actor and all, but I think they will definitely keep the tone in tact, and the world in MOS will be like the next BM world.

In TDK, Gotham city was a character and that really helped with the mood and tone, Im going to look for personification of Metropolis or Generalizations on today’s world to be MOS, the whole thing drawing to the conclusion that Superheroes are an everyday occurrence now, and that their motives and costumes are to be taken equally as serious. Basically, there has to be a need and a place for each of the heros in the justice league, with each representing a virtue that humans aspire to but maybe not always acheive. MOS-hope, TDK-determination, etc. In this way, it could be easier to establish what the Justice League really is all about. A bunch of good hearted men and women selflessly pulling their resources for the greater good. and like a volunteer, the specifics of each hero’s origins wouldn’t need to be stressed on as much as SM’s or BM’s. I love each JL hero’s character and their origins, but for a movie with so many personas to balance that will probably be tackling an overarching ambiguous theme, I think less will be more. Hence the Catwoman reference. If it’s done like this, then you can have a scenario where the JL is just getting established and on BM’s first day at the space station, it’s like Flash’s 3rd month. Unlike the avegers where they all join it at the same time. There will be time for characterization throughout the movie, so even though some heroes could start out seeming one dimensional, there will be room to become more dynamic. I feel that as long as it is evident in the JL movie, through situation and tone, that a character like Batman is more vital to the JL than Aquaman, then characterization will have been a success for the film (not to bag on Aquaman,). I understand that Selina Kyle isn’t as an impactful character as Green Lantern or whoever else, but im only talking about the technique used to portray her character.

This could also solve the issue for Green Lantern, the movie wasn’t good, some think Hal Jordan was the wrong choice, so I think the best thing to do, and probably will happen is for the JL to have Jon Stewart instead. This green lantern is full of depth and could have a Catwoman like appearance, proving his worth to the viewers (not just Green Lantern fans) to the JL team.

The tone is key, it has to answer the question, why don’t all the world powers come together and exterminate these freaks with their nuclear weapons, as well as explain why little kids look up to them and admire them as they would a fireman or police officer.

I think that’s Traps point. They will have to start with Superman, and wait some time before re-booting Batman to fit into the new Universe that will include JL. As opposed to starting with their already existing and hugely successful Batman franchise. Nolan’s Batman was supposed to stand alone from the start, so forcing it to fit into a new Universe just to make a JL movie would be risky, and probably won’t work very well. I’d like to see a Green Lantern sequel, Reynolds was a good Hal Jordan. Then maybe a Flash or Wonder Woman, THEN a Batman re-boot, and finally the JL movie. It will take years if they want to do it right. If they want a JL movie NOW, it’s going to be garbage and they might as well just call it a day.

Raimis third Spiderman was widely looked at as a failure, not the case with TDKR, even though it got mixed reactions. Spiderman also waited a few years to reboot.

Hulk wasnt even close to being on the same level as TDK movies, so its not as big of a deal to reboot, they knew they could make a better movie. Does anyone know for sure they can make a better, or more successful, Batman than we just saw?

Well all I will say is that everyone knows WHY batman is being rebooted. It is not the studio this time so people WILL accept the reboot whereas with Spiderman there was enough early success with it that there was really no need to reboot it. And a lot of people accepted that.

As to whether they can make Batman movies as good…maybe not but under the circumstances it would have a different purpose so I still thing fans would understand and accept it on another level even if it not quite AS good as the Dark Knight trilogy.

I don’t understand why the current Batman can’t be brought into the larger universe? Because it’s not “Unreal”? I don’t get it.
Batman has NO super powers, there’s nothing that unbelievable about him. His enemies aren’t really that fantastic super power wise either. Especially the ones that have been used.
The joker was perfect, and it’s not like they changed him much from the comics, same with Ra’s al Ghul. What was so different than the normal character?
Bane just didn’t have the “Venom” steroids, but so what? Catwoman was pretty much Catwoman…I could see the Batman tying into a larger more fantastic universe easily…one way is to do a World’s finest…Batman after TDKR was “Retired” I guess…he sees the events happen in Man of Steel and relizes there are newer bigger threats…he comes out of Retirement, gets himself fixed up a bit, gets some new leg braces like in the last movie and he’s back and in full on detective mode…Finds out who superman is quickly…gets some intel…blah blah…the worlds are joined and there’s no real discrepancy…
Why wouldn’t that work? Am I wrong?

That would tarnish TDK trilogy for me. IMO, DCs best bet is to release. Couple MOS movies, then reboot GL and Batman. In several years it would be much easier to reboot Batman than it would be currently.

Traps, they don’t seem to get it. Nolan’s Batman is a “stand alone.” As great as his take on Batman was and will always be, it’s not gonna be connected to future DC hero flicks that will be a part of a unified JUSTICE LEAGUE.

Nolan has left the building. Zack Snyder and Goyer are now the WB/DC cinematic over lords.

A lot of people here are confused by Nolan as producer partly because all of the rumors that this site feeds. I’ve got no problem with those articles, as I love reading about them, but it gives certain people hope, which turns into confusion when they receive conflicting reports with little evidence to go off.

Nolan and his wife had a hand in getting Superman off the ground ( pun intended ). They were instrumental in convincing Zack Snyder and HIS wife, Deborah to invest in MOS.

So as producers, the Nolans and the Snyders were involved in the “inception” ( pun intended ) of MOS. Nolan has handed the torch over to Snyder.

Now Snyder has the torch and Nolan is out. Snyder along with Goyer will continue to carry the torch, certainly for Superman and MAYBE for Justice League.

Time will tell what happens next. But I can’t imagine the kind of money Snyder was given to keep the torch going.

Patrick Bayard 1 year ago

I don’t disagree with you my point is that there is NO need to wait a significant amount of time to reboot Batman…plus nobody can blame WB for doing… it since it is Nolan who is basically forcing them to do it. Case closed!

If I were WB/DC I would have a new Wonder Woman film for Summer 2014 and a new Batman for Winter 2014. Then Green Lantern for 2015 and Justice League summer 2016.

Yeah, I agree. WB doesn’t necessarily have to wait another 5 or more years to get another Batman going.

I’ve been saying the SAME thing about Wonder Woman. That movie is just ready and begging to be made. EVERYONE knows who WW is. Why WB/DC has f*kced up so many times with WW is beyond me. But THAT is the next flick they should pour their full focus and energies on.

Superman is gonna be their next big trilogy and it begins in a month. It’s here.

A new Batman for 2014 is one of the worst ideas in the history of bad ideas. It will be compared to TDK and of course it won’t reach TDK’s standards and that precisely would make people start to lose interest in anything Batman that maybe coming out; people would then really appreciate Nolan’s Batman films more and removing that nostalgic feeling from the public would be troublesome.

My opinion:
Let MoS [Trilogy] lead to the Justice League film, even reboot or continue GL, create a wonder woman film. Batman and the other JL characters will be given a short background story in JL or even an origin story for them after the first JL.
This will mostly work because people will be overwhelmed by the JL film so much so that their focus won’t be just on Batman – and this will avoid comparison – but at the presence of all their favorite characters on the big screen.

In the James Bond series (a character not unlike Batman I might add) The transition from Sean Connery to Roger Moore and later Roger Moore to Timothy Dalton BOTH occurred within two years. In one instance it worked in the other it did not. You have no idea what people will accept. But Connery epitomized Bond and is often seen as the gold standard for the character. But they were able to reboot it successfully within two years. So it can be done.

ColdSc 1 year ago

I totally agree, Dark Knight trilogy was phenomenal but it was just intended as a lone trilogy, a lone story and I find it’s for the best. If they were to continue from there, there would be way too many plots, themes and ideas to deal with, the trilogy was mostly built around all those elements. I’m not saying it’s impossible but it’d be pretty damn hard to fit those elements into a full blown universe. Again it’s possible, but in the end is it worth it to mess with such a fragile trilogy?

I agree. People say that Nolan’s world can’t be expanded but when you stop and think about it the world can be altered a little to add unnatural things. Perhaps the government could have been hiding alien, amazon and science stuff which would explain why it wasn’t present in the DKT.

It can clearly be expanded but of what use will it be when Bale or most of the characters will not return to work for anyone other than Nolan?

Despite the fact that there was no Hulk, Thor etc in Iron Man 1 & 2, people started wondering where The Avengers where in Iron Man 3 because The Avengers movie came out the previous year. People think the real life universe/timeline is the same one in movies and if they put Bale’s Batman onscreen with Cavill, some people will want to know where Superman was when Bane took over Gotham.

Awesome, that’s what I just wrote too…you’re 100% correct…that would work easily…

Now Batman is in full on detective mode looking into these new threats and these new super powered “people”…figures out who superman is, etc…

Also, would love to see the storyline where batman’s contingency plans for each superhero gets used against them…I think it’s “Tower of Babel”…I’m remembering the Animated Movie: “Justice League: Doom” though…that was a good one…

I’d rather they continue it, even if loosely, from the point of either Batman Begins or the Dark Knight. The Dark Knight Rises serves as an ending story in itself. The film exist solely as such while either of its predecessors could be seen individually without the need of the other. The Dark Knight Rises is overly dependent on the set up of its predecessors- specific plot points of Begins and the conflict and ending of the Dark Knight to truly satisfy. Even then, there is mixed response about the film.

I just imagine the looks Batman will give Green Lantern when he tries to be funny and batmans serious… Just that blank angry stare lol… Not replying to green lanterns 1 liner just ignoring him and exiting the scene.

Lantern – Is he always that serious?
Superman – Nah he just doesn’t like you.

It can only work if DC and WB look at what makes Marvel’s movies so successful, does the same for Nolan’s Batman movies and then takes the best elements while keeping it as realistic as possible.

I’m not sure what the origins for DC characters are since the various reboots and re-imaginings began after the late 90s (and especially with The New 52) but I imagine writers have been taking the “grounded and realistic” approach like Marvel’s writers did around the same time (eg taking Stark out of a Chinese prison camp during the Vietnam war and putting him in the hands of Muslim extremists in the early days of the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan to make it up to date and more in keeping with real world events).

Not saying this has to happen because like I said, I’m not familiar with the comic book re-written origins but Flash as a reckless intern at a science lab who coasted throughout life and gets caught in an explosion while helping aid a study into free energy or fast regenerating cells for medical procedures could work potentially.

It may seem a little close to The Lizard’s work in The Amazing Spider-Man but that kind of research has been actually happening for a few years now and obviously it would mess with his cellular structure to make him super fast.

Honestly, I say keep the tone they’ll have in MOS, introduce Flash next (because Wonder Woman might be a little too similar to Superman if she’s an alien) then maybe have the John Stewart GL to deflect any possible confusion from casual moviegoers when Ryan Reynolds doesn’t return while also hinting at a “GL of legend” (Hal Jordan) for later introduction.

Debut the new Batman in the JL movie, sell most of the marketing on Superman, The Flash (and possibly Wonder Woman) with Martian Manhunter living up to his name and hunting Green Lantern at some point (maybe in the build up to the JL film), looking like a villain at first until he reveals that he needs the help of some special citizens of Earth.

The villain doesn’t have to be Darkseid immediately but a slow and steady approach to work out what works and what doesn’t in comic book movies is a must instead of rushing into production purely to try and steal thunder from Marvel, Sony, Fox etc.

I agree. It is weird as what the antagonist or conflict would be as most, if not all, the Justice League origins stories deal with alien invasion. Some may find it repetitive or a”rip-off” of the Avengers. Of course with Man of Steel also dealing with a first contact story and an invasion by General Zod, I am not entirely if this the route to follow.

Personally, though I am more interested in the personal conflicts between the actual characters. I would have the villains be in the back ground planning something. Similar to Young Justice, where the secret society of villains called the Light worked behind the scenes in order to increase their own power and influence. Thus, the point of focus will lie more on the League and the interpersonal conflicts that arise- perhaps manipulated by the villains.

Green Lantern can definitely be sent by the Guardians to find the Kryptonian and bring him back to Oa, the homeworld of the Green Lantern Corps for interrogation, for example. No one trust Batman with allegation that he may be responsible for numerous crimes in Gotham City. Wonder Woman sees other super-powered beings (males) as possible threats of which she can only stop. Aquaman tries to prove his dominance in the team and is against the Amazonian for past wars against the Atlantians- both coming from mythological places.

I think the tone of being grounded, yet fantastical is the way to go. Treat the circumstances of that world, that character, that mythology as if it were real and take it seriously. Not to say it cannot be fun or a popcorn flick. It definitely can but DC cannot afford to do tongue in cheek tone because some of their characters are still affected by past interpretation and jokes – Green Lantern, Wonder Woman, and of course Aquaman.

Agreed. he was always much more serious (most of the time) in the comics, and one of DCs’ greatest heroes (Hal Jordan GL). And Flash was not the dorky immature comedian he is often now portrayed in the cartoons (in the comics, tho, it was the serious Barry Allen, who’s character I love, along with Hal Jordan GL).

I agree. Before the movie came out (the Green Lantern) I began doing research on him and started to read his comics. He was a renegade but he was also militaristic and not as reckless as the movie portrayed him to be.

True, in the last decade or so, Green Lantern has been more serious and straight-laced, especially in light of all the tragedy in his life. Earlier, however, he was MUCH lighter and much more arrogant and flippant. When teamed with Green Arrow, Oliver had to rebuke him for his casual attitude and naivete about societal norms. I think Reynolds did great in the film, but yes, I too hope to see a more serious take on Green Lantern whenever he next appears.

That’s still no reason why they made the film adaptation into a goofy romp around space with a poorly made story line. Many comic book characters can be humorous, but the level of humor exhibited in the film is different from the level in the comics.

The Problem with The Justice League Movie is because all the Heroes have Super Powers Wonderman, Green Lantern, Superman, Flash, Aqua Man except The Dark Knight which just has Gadgets and Technology

One of the main reasons why The Avengers became such a big success was because each individual character had its own story and the only ones who had superpowers were Iron Man, Thor and Hulk

The Justice League would have to top that meaning that since all characters or most have superpowers the movie would have to be so good and real at the same time to be able to top The Avengers, Yes I agree with Green Lantern Living in a different Realm then The Dark Knight but Hal Gorden also lives in his planet called earth just like Bruce Wayne

If a Justice League was possible depending on how good Man of Steal is…Bring out the 5 I mentioned and let the Villian be..Darksied Doomsday for Justice League 2

I see what you’re saying though, Avengers only did well because they built up each individual character in a solo movie over several years before putting them together. If they teamed right off the bat, it wouldn’t have been nearly as successful.

True, but I would rather see characters introduced (and ones I don’t know) than go to see basically the same thing only they all team up. As you said though the audience would recognize Batman and Superman so that itself would get others in the seats, plus a group of characters that haven’t been seen before (ever on the big screen) would cause people to go into overload. Superman and Batman as advertisements and the other characters as story/flashbacks and cliff hangers.

Darkseid. Doomsday. Reverse Flash. Time Commander. Sinestro. There are 5 villains right there who could team up against the JLA. Also, I want to see Green Lantern (Hal Jordan/Ryan Reynolds) and Flash (Barry Allen) have a BIG part in this!

But imagine a space station being made to crash into the ocean and the huge tsunami that follows creeping towards the US until it suddenly stops and we zoom in on news helicopter footage of a man (played by Kaiwei Lyman) with longe blonde hair and a huge beard acting as if he’s keeping the water at bay somehow.

Quick question if you can help. Which of the Blackest Night/Brightest Day books do you recommend? I’m hoping to get full volumes but won’t bother if they don’t have all issues (like the Batman: No Man’s Land book only has 40 out of 80 issues compiled).

Thanks, much appreciated. Yeah, I got Rebirth but it’s nice to know the order and the other books to fully appreciate it. My main reason for getting Brightest Day is that I am admittedly a John Constantine fan and I heard he appears at some point.

I just don’t see how you translate Aquaman to film. Can he talk under water?…how would you film that? If he can’t, then what is the point since that is the element he needs to be in to be fully realized? I am not opposed to the idea totally but I would have him as a minor character who more or less advises the other Justice League members periodically and disappears in the ocean until he is needed.

Have Atlantis in some kind of air pocket like you can sometimes find underwater? Either that or dimensional portal that leads to Atlantis and it didn’t really sink, it was just transported somewhere safe with the only access being in the Atlantic Ocean.

Read the “New52″ Aquaman stories for an idea of how he can be successfully portrayed. As for Atlantis, that story already exists in human mythology, so I’m not seeing the difficulty in bringing the character to the big screen…if put together carefully.

Bringing up Atlantis is not the problem…the problem is that almost every other hero is land based and several of them are cosmic in nature. Having a significant portion of a movie occur underwater would seem counter productive. Filming them interacting with each other underwater is also VERY difficult to do. Can you think of any movie set underwater (and I am not talking about in a submarine). There is a movie Empires of the Deep which I have heard is horrid and no studio outside of China was willing to back.

Most of the team would be on land and Aquaman’s scenes can take place, like I said, in some kind of air pocket or other dimension accessed under the Atlantic. Therefore, Atlanteans can be seen talking and interacting on dry land too.

It’d be like assuming that Hawkman’s HQ has to be in the clouds and other characters need jetpacks to be able to interact with him in the sky.

I’ve never particularly seen the point in Aquaman other than “hey, lets have a water based superhero!” but at least I’m trying to be creative about it and not assume it will all take place with every character in scuba suits like you seem to be. That’s very close minded of you.

If you want to get the solution about how the other superheroes would reach the underwater city Atlantis, then you must read the Indian comic book “Grand Master Robo” and “Samari ki Jwala”, which portrays an underwater city named “Devnagri” and the people who live in it are Half-Human Half-Gods [ I think the proper term is Demigods]. One of their Demigod named “Dhananjay” uses a magic portal to open door to any location in the world. And whenever he needs any superhero in his city, he just brings them via this magic portal opened right into his city. This way there is no need of superheroes swimming back-and-forth to go underwater.
Though the artwork of these two comic books reminds me of the early spiderman issues.

For speaking, assume Atlantis has barriers such as seen in the underwater city present in Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace. That solves your dilemma about other characters. Filming underwater, or filming and then making it appear underwater can be a challenge for some things but it is not impossible.

Who knows, who is to say that Atlanteans are not telepathic in communicating underwater.

Man of Steel will set the tone for all the future DC shared universe movies. From the look of it, the MoS universe could house a new Batman, GL, WW and it would all make sense in one way or the other. Unveil the new Batman in the JL movie and give audiences another reason to go see it. It sells itself if you have Superman and Batman in the same movie. Getting to see WW and Flash for the first time as well as a new GL? It’s box office gold.

That’s why I said Batman should be introduced in JL too. Though my idea was mainly to keep all mention of Batman out of JL marketing and have him just show up as a surprise to casual audiences so that anticipation of Christian Bale’s version won’t be apparent because otherwise, saying “Batman will feature too” will have people expecting to see his face and possibly leaving disappointed that Bale isn’t involved.

After the credits roll…. Superman finds out about a bomb about to destroy a city called Gotham and on his way there he sees a Batwing flying over the ocean towing the bomb and he is the one that saves Batman. Thats how Batman lived through the explosion and thats how they tie the DCverse (see what i did there)together. Im not saying they should show all this happen but maybe a reference to it or something.

Unless you have seen Man of Steel, you dont know what Superman was doing for those months. Also, I said he saved Batman from getting blown up. He can still retire after being saved. not perfect but would be awesome.

Did Nolan tell you that? With all the secrets he kept about TDKR you think he would let people know it wasn’t a shared universe? And where was it ever said that he retired. I just saw him eating with Kyle. Yes he left the keys with “robin” (also something Nolan said he would never do) but that doesn’t mean retirement. Looked like he retired after TDK and look how that turned out.

Did Nolan tell you that? With all the secrets he kept about TDKR you think he would let people know it wasn’t a shared universe? And
where was it ever said that he retired. I just saw him eating with Kyle. Yes he left the keys with “robin” (also something Nolan said he would never do) but that doesn’t mean retirement. Looked like he retired after TDK and look how that turned out.

It’s assumed he’s retired…but so what…he comes out of retirement when he realizes he’s needed…he took 8 years off between TDK and TDKR…
there’s bigger threats to Gotham and the world…plus, he was practically dead in batman begins…this is easily explained and not hard to bring him back to being batman…

It is not that simple. He gave away all of his toys…Commissioner Gordon knows who he is…I don’t even think he is even a billionaire anymore. How would Catwoman factor in that…did he leave her in Europe? It would completely undo the Dark Knight trilogy making almost half of what happened in the third movie irrelevant.

Actually, if you have watched the trailers and read some of the synopsis from Man of Steel, it seems that Lois has been tracking this mysterious hero type that has been saving people, so it looks like Superman was going around saving people before he reveals himself suit and all…if that’s true, which is what it’s looking like, that would fit perfectly actually…

He could have saved batman during that time…so this idea would work great…and as for retirement…since when is a comic book retirement carved in stone, hell, death for super heroes is reversed constantly…Bruce Wayne can’t come back from retirement?? As for Bruce Wayne being dead, he was practically declared dead during batman begins since he was “missing” for so long when he was traveling around training…he has a propensity for doing random stuff like that in this established story, so why would now be any different…? He could totally come back…

Bringing in the Bale Batman would be easy…and superman saving him would be great, on top of batman then finding out there are aliens…he’s gotta come back…it seems like a great tie in to me…why reboot him so close…look what that did for spiderman…it was unnecessary…you already have a great Batman from these last three..who cares what Nolan said…he said a lot of things…

Tie them together in a world’s finest, make a standalone flash with a batman cameo or something…a 2nd Green Lantern with a Martian Manhunter Cameo type thing…and right to Justice league…introduce wonder woman there…I think it works…

Nolan’s Batman is the result of trying to make the audience believe that an ordinary man can become a vigilante visionary hero. So it’s rooted in a mindset of ultra practicality. In a movie like Green Lantern, you have to believe that there’s a core of “space police” of all different species that have magic rings fueled by will. It’s hard to do that and be “serious” or practical about it…but not impossible. It is my personal belief that the Warner/DC movies should follow a tone of “myths are real”. In Man of Steel, we’re getting a sense of that with a first contact with another alien race theme thrown into the film. Aquaman is something that can have a similar tone with, the Lost City of Atlantis being found, a war between us and the Atlanteans until we unite to defeat a greater enemy or disaster. This does for the JLA what Thor did for the Avengers which is introduces us to another world of fantasy within “reality” and rationalizes their magic as advanced technology. Wonder Woman too can exist as a “lost tribe of Amazons” either as a nomadic group of female warriors who have a hidden oasis as their home in the Middle East (Greek Amazon so Turkey/Black Sea/Mediterranean Sea) or an actual lost tribe in South America…for simplicity sake that both derive their strength from artifacts/ancient technology. Batman/Bruce Wayne, I think needs to be introduced as the JLA’s Nick Fury – in that he’s putting together the team, he’s finding these supernatural beings, catching them off guard and maybe even besting them or equaling them earning their respect. He’s the brain’s of the operation. This Batman should be older, wiser, “slicker” and more of a detective than the ones before with a dash of Jason Bourne or The Driver (Drive). But again we’re left with Green Lantern…I’d say the Green Lantern that crashes on earth and gives his ring to Hal (or whatever version they choose) needs to be the “herald” of warning for an evil/threat that is coming in the JLA movie. Making JLA a quick origin story for Green Lantern or it can be handled as a post credits easter egg of say Aquaman with the ship crashing near water. I think they’re going to have the same problem with Green Lantern as Marvel has with the Hulk in that audiences might not want another origin story in a movie to itself. So let’s build up the JLA conflict and DC universe story and Green Lantern becomes a “spin-off” after the first JLA movie. Cyborg? I’d like to see him introduced in one of the movies as an attempt to take Kryptonian/Atlantean/Ancient Greek technology and build a weapon to defend humans against the super heroes, Kind of like how War Machine is created. Flash? Honestly I know it’s too late now, but wouldn’t it be cool if at the end of Man of Steel, Barry (or whichever) is looking for Superman, follows him (at super speed) and finds Clark and challenges him to a race. In a way that says “I’m different too, I thought I was the only one.” Anyway those are just my thoughts, that’s my DC Movie Universe pitch.

I bet you liked dumping all your toys on the ground and playing with them together, headless of the contradictory universes, watered down plausibility, or baffling incongruities. I can appreciate that. I did that too. As for the DC characters though, as soon as you pile them all together you have a Saturday morning cartoon, not a Dark Knight calliber masterpiece. The Avengers was fun,but very silly, and I don’t really want Batman hanging out with Wonderwoman, a Cyborg, a magical fish man and an alien cop. Even introducing Robin was a seriously questionable and delicate move, because the legacy of Robin as a campy, colorful sidekick was at odds with the tone and realistic world of Nolan’s Dark Knight. This sounds like a movie that is far from being serious or gritty or realistic or adult oriented. That’s fine for the kids who just want a DC Avengers, but for those of us who like the DC depth and mature severity, it makes no sense to wrap the present and future of all those franchises into a single kid-friendly gumbo of superhero justice.

Where do you come off with this crap? I’m not sure what your background is with these characters or even suggesting that the comic books are the end all, since I myself haven’t read comics in years. But you act like Nolan’s universe is the alpha and omega when it comes to DC. I think he did a fantastic job, but Justice League is a huge part of the DC story arcs. Just in researching characters for fun, I’ve found out that there are entire other timelines and alternate realities. And to say all of this is kid friendly is ludicrous. Nightwing is, or was Robin, and his storylines can be very dark. The Doomsday arc has tons of destruction and the death of the indestructible Superman. I think you need to get off your high horse and quit comparing people who want an interesting team-up adventure to children playing with toys. Nolan didn’t invent Batman and though I think he did a fantastic job with the world, he didn’t even perfect it. There are other stories out there that can be realistic in a “hyper-realistic” way and still be good. Get over yourself lol.

It can be tough to type while laughing, but I am gonna give it a shot. So funny though, it may be impossible. Fortunately this response was not from the guy that I was responding to, who may yet read and even understand my polite, playful, and personal opinion. But as for “DoubleJ”, I think that boat has sunk. Not only is my opinion offensive to him, but also illegitimate and in need of some sorting out. Oddly enough though, he tells ME to get over myself while lecturing me on the absurdity of my OPINIONS. But I am not going to devolve into being rude and hurling sputtering statements of indignation. I’ll just clarify for his sake and anyone who reads this comment.

Firstly this is only my opinion, and I don’t intend to tell anyone else how to enjoy r not enjoy anything, (unlike double J). Allow me to refute everything he said or implied, leaving out only a response to the delightful opening question “where do you get off?”. Which is not only a bad way to start a conversation, but it’s also an inappropriate query.

My background with this material is far from complete, or even well versed. I am not a comic aficionado, but I grew up caring about some of these characters. My perspective is not intended to be learned or more accurate or relevant, just the personal thoughts, reactions, preferences and concerns of a casual fan. I am not saying that the comics are an unworthy source of material or continuity or anything else. I do not feel that Nolan defines what DC is, nor that he or his films are somehow perfect, blessed, ideal, or “the alpha and the omega.”. They WERE uncommonly good comicbook films, and much closer in tone to what I find compelling than a movie like Avengers, which I actually also loved.

I do feel strongly that in cases where a group is not fundamentally part of the DNA of the stories, (such as the many mutations in the Xmen) that forcing a group together is unnatural and gimmicky at best. I’d go so far as to say that the inspiration for the Avengers was undoubtedly gimmickry instead of an inspired and relevant cooperation. Against the odds it turned out pretty good, but it also put some very ordinary mortals into a magical world of gods and aliens. Is Tony better off in this larger world, or was Earth big enough for him? Is Batman better in Gotham, or should he fight aliens in space alongside the super powered Wonder Woman? I think the artistic value of Batman and his world and stories, gets compromised by supernatural and even JusticeLeague style modification. I like him best in the Nolan movies and the darker comics like “Dark Knight Returns”, “Joker”, “The Killing Joke”, Batman Year One.”. Etc.

I don’t assume that every story that piles on the heros is made for kids or inherently childish, beyond the undeniable comparison I make to the youthful desire to combine toys from disparate stories. I find the impulse to throw Batman and Superman and Aquaman, etc into the same story to be very much like the desire to play freely with all your toys. That doesn’t mean they can’t tell an adult oriented tale, but the premise is gimmicky in a decidedly youthful way, and admitting that didn’t diminish my enjoyment of Avengers. It might easily taint my enjoyment of Batman, however, if they went right from the last film into a group film, defining him in such a starkly different and less interesting light. (Still my OPINION here, in case you lose track. I haven’t …). Who invented him isn’t the issue at all, and neither is Nolan, who’s flawed but phenomenal work is now clearly OVER. My interest is in how the characters are treated, and making Batman part of a superhero league sounds like a weak direction for the film franchise. (Also, the more magical people in tights you put on screen, the sillier it all gets, no matter how “adult” you want to make it.)

Clearly Superman is another can of worms, being that he is a magical alien and all, and so realism walks another line with him. Even so, I can see enjoying a delicately told tale of Batman and Superman, perhaps as a one off, if it didn’t embarrass or damage either franchise to do it.

It was not intended as an insult when I mentioned the potential for “contradictory universes, watered down plausibility, and baffling incongruity.”. (none of which you responded to at all). I told Super, just to be clear, that I liked to play with MY toys that way. I get the impulse to pull out all the restrictions and just have fun. (I didn’t compare people to children as a clumsy insult to Super or anyone else, but as a way to discuss the root impulse at work. I’d be surprised if he is offended and angry the way you are, since I read his thoughts carefully and responded thoughtfully.) I don’t think it suits the quality of story and character work that I want out of DC, particularly when it overlaps into a world that has been successfully non-magical like Batman. I’m sure he’s been a space ninja in some comic, but I like him best as a realistic person who lives in THIS world. A JL movie may quickly cancel that concept, and if they really emulate Marvel then the next many years may reinvent characters in ways I dislike. Will Batman be a team leader for the next 10 years of films? I hope not.

Finally, I do sympathize with the urge to combine, and tried to make that clear so as not to make anyone feel I was dismissing their perspective or failing to imagine the payoff they envision. From the perfectly reasonable perspective of a movie fan and a Batman fan, and a Superman fan, I have great concerns over the motive, the inspiration, and the handling of a JL project outside of animation. It will define the current version of those characters for possibly many years to come, undermining the value of their own mythos and setting, I don’t think I will enjoy that very much, and I wish they would not attempt it. That’s not something you have any say in because it is my own opinion. If I told you that it had to be YOUR opinion, then maybe I would warrant the “get off your high horse” comment you lobbed at me. (Also, my horse isn’t high, he just has allergies).

Thinking you would ever care about anything I say might earn me the final jab “get over yourself”, but I didn’t make any such assumption. Of course, now that I know my words have such powerful effects on you, I may get a big head after all. I’m just trying to enjoy the conversation and contribute when I can. I try not to be disrespectful of anyone here, and never really argue with those who do the same. Some people just can’t resist, but your response was needlessly rude. A consequence free environment like the net rarley brings out the best in people, or inspires restraint, but really it seems like you missed my points and the validity of a differing opinion in your haste to insult me. Maybe read it again without all the nasty assumptions you made? It was pretty reasonable. If your misguided response had been less obnoxious then I would apologize for offending you, however accidentally, but under the circumstances: don’t hold your breath.

I think I get it. Having Batman in a big fight against a large (probably alien/magical) threat would probably clash with the tone of his solo films and make the following Batman movies seem a bit pants – e.g. “Batman helped fight Doomsday, so why is he struggling against Black Mask?!”

One of my few complaints against The Avengers (I’m easily pleased – there’s probably more wrong with it than I care to admit) was that a lot of it seemed to be a sequence of contrived events leading up to various ‘flashpoints’ – the movie equivalent of video game ‘setpieces’ which are oh-so-popular these days, where you are effectively rail-roaded into an overly scripted event that’s meant to make you say, “Wow!” or something significantly ruder and harder to explain away in the presence of young children. However, whether we’re comic book fans or ‘just’ movie fans (I don’t like the notion that someone is somehow worth ‘less’ because they don’t study fifty years of comic books) we kind of hope that there *is* an excuse for these heroes to team up, because that’s awesome!

So, a few ideas for how things could work – have Brainiac as the enemy. According to DC Universe Online (yeah, I’m not a massive comic buff either) Brainiac has an army of robots. In movies/games, this is basically an excuse to be ridiculous. Honestly, the most gory games in Japan are only allowed because the victims are robots. That just makes everything ok. So Batman, with all of his amazing gadgets, can suddenly use explosives, potentially damaging cryo-weaponry, thermite-enhanced batarangs… OK, I’m making stuff up, but you can see what I’m talking about, right? Superman doesn’t have to worry about killing someone with a supersonic punch. Aquaman doesn’t have to worry about crushing somebody under a whale. Green Lantern doesn’t have to worry about his franchise because he can have a rollicking good time beating up ‘bots.

To quote the Justice League cartoon – “I feel like I live in a world made of cardboard, always taking constant care not to break something, to break someone. Never allowing myself to lose control even for a moment, or someone could die. But you can take it, can’t you, big man? What we have here is a rare opportunity for me to cut loose and show you just how powerful I really am.”

When in their solo films, fighting against their equals, they can’t go all out because they don’t want to be murderers. I could point out that The Avengers basically committed genocide against a possibly brainwashed alien race, but hey. The solo Justice Leaugers would have to be clever and use their own personal strengths that aren’t simply, “What can I do to cause the biggest possible destruction?”

Lots of interesting thoughts. Well put. I am no expert on these universes, and don’t know Apocolypse even, but I get all your main points. As for the surprisingly fun but ridiculous Avengers movie, I am glad they did it, but don’t want the same from the DC universe at all. The story was thin, but the writing and characterization of the various personalities was consistently expert and appropriate. I love the dynamic between Banner and Stark, and think it could hardly have been done better, but they have clearly compromised the “realer” characters and mythos by telling such a magical tale of alien invasion. It may damage the world of Iron Man, for instance, to have made his world supernatural when it didn’t have to be at all. Anyway, good ideas! Thanks for responding.

I think this is a case of the pot meeting the kettle. I really said nothing that was to be construed as rude except for my mistake of using the word “crap.” You can put your nose up and say you’re taking the high road if you please, but comparing posters to children just because they think Justice League would be cool comes off as a rather snobbish thing to say (at least through the rigid form of type) Anyway, this line of the discussion will hopefully end here. I think this has been mainly a misunderstanding of how things can come off differently than how someone intends when there is no vocal tone. I didn’t even take it as a personal attack really, not that it matters, but the overall comparison to children doesn’t often sit well with people.

I’ll be honest, I like the idea of a Justice League film and if done I think it could be great (if treated with care by the right director and a creative writer). But I don’t hold hope for such a thing as I have a feeling WB will screw it up for the cash grab. And your view on Batman is admirable. I share it. But from the little I know of the source material, that’s what made Batman so great in the team-ups. Despite all his frailties of being a human and having no powers, he always got the best of the super-villains and even the super heroes because he was two steps ahead.

It was a *positive* comparison. If something is awesome enough, we don’t ask questions. It’s why Optimus Prime would team up with Superman in my youth. The Avengers is one of the highest grossing films of all time despite 80% of it being paper-thin excuses for characters to meet/fight.

The final battle was effectively the genocide of a possibly-brainwashed alien race where everyone just hit them. Repeatedly. Then when that started to fail, they hit things harder. Then they hit things with a nuke. In retrospect, it was pretty rubbish, story-wise. But it was still awesome.

We’ve come to expect that silliness from Marvel, but the DC setup with Batman Begins, whilst still having some humour, is different. It’s not necessarily realistic, but it feels more real. I never had any doubt about what would happen in the various Marvel films aside from Captain America, which I thought would be an, “America! F**k yeah!” style film but made fun of (and somehow still respected) that aspect of the character’s past. The Batman films were tense. Bane was brutal.

A comic book movie where the heroes are in real danger – kinda blows my childhood Superman/Optimus team-up out of the water. Every action has repercussions and the hero doesn’t always win and even if the hero does win, it’s not going to be perfect. It’s more interesting than, ‘Let’s you and him fight!’ x1000

Okay, doubleJ, peace already! I get a little over zealous perhaps when I think people are needlessly disrespectful of each other, and while you may not have intended to be rude, evidence was to the contrary. After all, you did start with “Where do you come off with this crap?”, end with “Get over yourself”, and throw in a “get off your high horse”, which combined with not acknowledging the validity of my thoughts seemed pretty disrespectful. On the other hand I can see how my analogy to kids with toys might have come across as insulting and dismissive, but that wasn’t my intention. Hopefully I clarified my meaning.

As far as a JL movie, I would have much less concern if I thought it would be a one-off idea or a seperate entity entirely. I think I could surely enjoy the kind of story you are talking about, and even Batman’s role within it. My concern is that even if it comes across as better than the Avengers, (as the current benchmark for combined superhero franchises), it still leaves Batman in a role that is incompatible with his BEST version, in my mind. If he is strictly a team player in a magical world for the next many years of DC films then I will be dissapointed, and miss my favorite character’s solo days. However, if they keep this JL idea limited in scope, and are careful not to imply that the next solo film is about the same version of the character that fought aliens, then maybe there is nothing to fear at all. Just as the animated films don’t damage the live films because they are accepted as different entities, the JL movie doesn’t HAVE to damage my favorite character for years to come. It can just repurpose him for another story, as unrelated to the next solo Batman as Tim Burton’s movies are to Nolan’s trilogy. Then maybe we will all be happy…until we find something to fight about!

This is kind of the problem…these movies are NOT just for comic book fans to see their favorite stories come to life. They have to appeal to a wider and broader and more general audience many of whom have no idea who 90% of the people listed are. Studios are NOT going to just cater movies to comic fans because they cannot be profitable doing so. There are not enough of them.

Well i don’t see it that way.If you think about it, you will see that both Iron Man and lets say Captain had very different tone’s, because the driving force behind each protagonist in the film was very different

Agreed on that…plus people say Batman was grounded. How? He was Batman like in the comics and cartoons…he had crazy gadgets, that crazy ass batcar, the bat pod…hell, where does something like the friggin’ bat wing exist in real life…it was total comic book type tech…and was cool…sonar vision, etc…he seemed pretty much like batman to me…and his tone was dark…like it should be…he’s batman for god sakes…

Batman is still very much a comic book character, but he IS relatively grounded. There are no super beings in his movies and many core stories. There is no such thing as magical powers or whole groups of magical people or planets full of fancy aliens. While they do not specify much, it is easy to assume that the movie version lives in the same world with the same laws, restrictions and mundane mediocrity. Batman punches drugged-out street thugs. Superman flies to Krypton and fights aliens. They are, shall we say, worlds apart. Mixing the two is a potentially unfortunate, disastrous, or at the very least controversial move that DOES diminish the tone of relative realism that has driven Batman in films as of late. Also, while the Bat(wing) may not fly, the car certainly exists and does drive, because realism and grounded plausibility was important. In a JL movie we may have an invisible jet and flying aliens, which kinda makes carrying car keys seem out of place…

It is a really bad idea if the grumpy, uncreative, old people running DC Comics and Warner Brothers approach a Justice League movie the same way Marvel has approached to the Avengers. I have this awesome, brilliant idea, that can work out for Justice League, with all 5-6 main characters being included. I’d suggest they start of Justice League movie, just start it out, make the story epic, plothole-less, serious and dark, and suspenseful with Henry Cavill as Superman, the other dude who played Green Lantern as Green Lantern, the dude starring Arrow as the Green Arrow, and maybe Christian Bale as Batman (doesn’t matter who is Batman, as long as Batman is on the movie and keeps his dark, rebellious attitude).

Do JL, gain billions and billions of dollars, and boom, Warner Bros has enough money to make standalone films for each character. Make a trilogy about each main JL character and concentrate about the individual character itself, and in the end of the trilogy, have it be linked to the Justice League 1 story (like how Star Wars films did).

I want them to kill human characters like in The Dark Knight. Make it feel like something is at stake and not the light-hearted way Marvel did the Avengers. I enjoy the Avengers, but something darker could be more awesome. I didnt see a human corpse after the NY attack in the Avengers, so nobody died?…They cant save everyone, thats what Im saying.

soooo many excuses over the JLA movie because they don’t care to make one! The Superman and Batman franchises make them a lot of money; thats why they keep rebooting them! stick them together with other heroes? why? they wont even do a Worlds Finest movie (Batman with Superman). What kind of comment is that “2 different worlds”? Batmans Gotham has always been darker than Supermans Metropolis. I thought writers were creative! Gimme a break! Not every city is alike! Compare Detroit to Milan, Italy! Same planet, different cities, different tones. They can exist at the same time! Or just make them fight Darkseid on Apocalyps! Lame excuses! Smallville had no problem introducing DC characters/teams without giving them their own show (ie the Justice Society 2parter on Smallville). Sad, lame excuses not to do the JLA film. At least DC has decent animated superhero shows/movies. The youtube fan movies are great too! See Batman:Dead End or Lobos Paramilitary Christmas. Well done

Maybe I am missing something but after seeing GL and the last set of Batman movies. Why do people keep on saying two different worlds and it would be off if those two worlds joined as one.
If you read a Batman comic and a GL comic without guest superheroes, for eg. Batman vs the Joker in his book and GL in Coast City vs.whosoever which leads him into space, then the two team up in a Justice League book and talk about their encounters it seems normal to me even tho the tones of their individual books seemed different.
I think this is just been blown out of proportion, no way could Nolan’s Batman live in our real world and survive, well maybe, but for how long especially as a vigilante.

Just characters have two separate tones to their personalities (Jordan and Wayne) doesn’t mean they can’t be joined. Take Captain America and Iron man, for instance. Very different, but can still exist in the same universe.